Wesley Corpus

in which of their writings? This needs some proof: I absolutely deny the fact. So that all which follows is mere flourish, and falls to the ground at once; and all that you aver of their “open and scandalous opposition to the Twentieth Article” (ibid.) is no better than open and scandalous slander. 6. Your Second assertion is this: “The Methodist, for the perdition of the souls of his followers, openly gives our Saviour the lie, loads the Scripture with falsehood and contradic tion; ” (and pray what could a Mahometan, or infidel, or the devil himself do more?) “yea, openly blasphemes the name of Christ, by saying that the works of men are of no consideration at all; that God makes no distinction between virtue and vice, that he does not hate vice or love virtue. What blasphemy then and impiety are those wretches guilty of who, in their diabolical frenzy, dare to contradict our Saviour's authority, and that in such an essential article of religion l” (Pages 7-9.) Here also the Methodists plead, Not Guilty, and require you to produce your evidence; to show in which of their writings they affirm that God “will not reward every man according to: his works; that he makes no distinction between virtue and vice; that he does not hate vice or love virtue.” These are positions which they never remember to have advanced. If you can, refresh their memory. 7. You assert, Thirdly, the Methodists, by these positions, “destroy the essential attributes of God, and ruin his character as Judge of the world.” Very true; if they held these positions. But here lies the mistake. They hold no such positions. They never did. They detest and abhor them. In arguing, therefore, on this supposition, you are again “beating the air.” 8. You assert, Fourthly, the Methodists “teach and propa gate downright Atheism,-a capital crime; and Atheists in some countries have been put to death. Hereby they make room for all manner of vice and villany; by which means the bands of society are dissolved. And therefore this attempt must be considered as a sort of treason by Magistrates.” (Pages 10, 11.)- Again we deny the whole charge, and call for proof; and, blessed be God, so do the Magistrates in Great Britain. Bold, vehement asseverations will not pass upon them for legal evi dence: Nor indeed on any reasonable men.